QƲI bene distinguit, bene docet; it will therefore be re­quisite to premise a word or two for distinction's sake.

And First, We need not trouble our selves to de­fine Conscience logically, but taking that word grosly, and as it is vulgarly understood, we mean by Consci­ence any Man's Perswasion of what he is to believe and pra­ctise, which may be of two sorts;

1. Either first, of such things as may be known by the common Light of Nature: Or,

2. Such things as are known only by Divine Revelation. And these are of two sorts:

1st. Such as concern the revealed Will of God under the Old Testament, which is called the Law: Or,

2dly. The Revealed Will of God under the New Testa­ment, which is called the Gospel. And,

Secondly, By Liberty we mean an Immunity from Punishment, and that is either,

1. Divine, viz. the just Judgments of God.

2. Humane, and those are twofolde;

(1.) Civil and Temporal Punishments, by loss of Life, Limb, or Estate, &c.

(2.) Ecclesiastical, by the Admonitions and spiritual Cen­sures of the Church. These things being premised, the Truth concerning Liberty of Conscience will be cleared by the proof of the following Propositions.

I. First then, if the Conscience be erroneous by any great Fault against the common Light of Nature, we cannot assert any Freedom to it: For God will punish it, and the King will punish it, and so should the Church too by her spiritual Cen­sures: [Page 2] and the greater the Error is as to the clearness of the Light, against which it is committed, or as to the Mischief and Malignity of it, the more punishable it is; for else we should introduce a Liberty for professed Atheism, Blasphemy, Mur­ther, Adultery, Theft, &c. for Catilines and Ravilliacks, &c. for Punishments in such cases may be proper and more likely to amend the Delinquent, and save the Community from such Mischiefs as such Errors tend to bring upon it. Yet do not good Magistrates write all their Laws in Blood, but decree Capital Punishments only against Capital Offenders, and especially for such Offences as are against the second Table, which Magistrates are better able to judg of, and strike at the Root and Being of Civil Societies, as Murther, Paricide, &c. I mentioned gross Errors in the Proposition, for as Aquinas saith in his Summes, All Faults against natural Light belong not to the Cognizance of the Civil Magistrate, who is a publick Person, but are to be corrected by Oeconomicks and Ethicks; so for the most part the Faults of Children are to be corrected by their Parents.

Besides, some gross Errors may be excepted as they may be circumstantiated or over-ruled by Education and Religion, therefore the Christians did not persecute the Heathens as the Heathens persecuted them, although the Idolatries of the Hea­thens were contrary to common Light, nor do the Protestants persecute the Papists as the Papists persecute the Protestants, though some of the Errors of the Papists, as Transubstantia­tion, are grosly against the common Light of Reason and Sense it self; but more tolerable as Errors meerly, than paying Pe­ter-pence to the Pope is in Civil Government.

II. Prop. Such Jews as lived in the Times of the Old Testa­ment were not to have the Liberty of their Consciences as to humane Punishments, though a great part of that Law consist­ed only of the revealed Will of God; for God's Will was likewise revealed that they should be punished. Now these Or­dinances unto which the Jews were bound, were mostly con­cerning the outward Man, and very clearly revealed: Besides, the Jews had their Ʋrim and Thummim, their Priests and Pro­phets, whom God according to his Promise, Deut. 18. 18. rai­sed up from time to time for their Direction, whom the People were bound to hear under penalty of Excision; neither were [Page 3] the Strangers that dwelt in the Land, and were but Proselytes of the Gate, to be tolerated in Blasphemy, Lev. 24. 16. in Ido­latry, Deut. 17. 4, 5. in Sabbath-breaking, Exod. 31. 15. so Numb. 15. 35. it was revealed that he who gathered Sticks up­on the Sabbath-day should be put to death; though for other things God did not bind the Gentiles to the like Obedience to the Law with the natural Jews: Neither did the Jews require it of them, nor do they now; from whence it appears that is a great Paralogism to argue from what was done by Kings and Princes under the Old Testament, to the like under the New, as if a Man should now argue from Elijah's slaying Baal's Pro­phets, 1. Kings 18. 20. or from that in Zech. 13. 3. Thou shalt not live, for thou speakest Lies in the Name of the Lord, as some have argued from Asa's Covenant to put Men to Death, 2 Chron. 15. 13. what a hideous deal of Mischief might an ig­norant Zealot be perswaded to do from ill managing the Old Testament; as I have heard some in the Pulpit to argue from thence for the observation of the Lord's Day, as would prove the Saturday Sabbath, and not lawful now under the Gospel to kindle a Fire upon Saturday.

But some will say, that the Equity of that Law obligeth still, giving to Kings and Princes power to reform the House of God.

I answer, Be it so; but what that Equity is must not be taken as every Man shall imagine of his own Head, but from the Law of Nature, and from the positive Law of Christ: Placeus says that those Kings were all typical; and it is probable that in the spiritual sense, not Kings, but prevalent Parties in the Christian Church are to be understood, so Hierom ad Paulinum, Haeretico­rum bella adversus Ecclesiam declarantur. A Magistrate may do much for the propagation of the Christian Religion against such Errors as are meerly against the Gospel, by protection of the Orthodox, by his Munificence, Encouragement, Direction, Example, and against moral Errors and Impieties by due coer­cion; for where these are carefully look'd to, no fear but the Gospel will thrive well: but that the Magistrate is to punish Er­rors and Heresies meerly concerning the Faith of Christ, where there is not sufficient mixture of moral Impiety, proved by suf­ficient Witnesses, that this I say is any part of the moral Equity of that Law, I deny, affirmanti incumbit probatio.

[Page 4] III. My third Conclusion is this, Errors and Heresies against the Faith of Christ, only and meerly as such, are not to be puni­shed with civil Punishments by the Christian Magistrate. I shall prove this Proposition by these Arguments following.

I. First I reason ab Authoritate divinâ negativè, which no Lo­gician can reasonably deny in this case. I reason therefore thus, Our Saviour Christ hath neither by himself, nor by his Apostles, commanded any such thing; therefore no such thing ought to be done. To meddle with the Estates, Liberties, Limbs or Lives of Men is no indifferent thing, but a matter of great con­sequence, and therefore our Saviour Christ, who was the great Law-giver of the Christian Church, and was faithful to him that appointed him, who spared not to threaten and denounce the Judgments of God, and knew very well that the Christians would one day gain the Imperial Crown; I say, he would not only have commanded all Christian Kings and Princes in a thing so important, (as Mahomet bids his Disciples to fight for the Faith, with promise of great Reward) but have given them plain and particular Rules to guide them, that they should not draw the Ruin and Blood of Men upon them where 'tis so dan­gerous to mistake and exceed. Our Saviour foresaw the grand and general Apostacy of the Christians from the Purity of the Faith, and was therefore very unlikely to put such Knives into the hands of Apostates, or Men imperfectly reform'd: We see what Work they have made for their abominable Heresies, thinking to do God Service in burning Men alive; which is enough to satisfy any Man of a true Christian Spirit of the An­tichristianism of the Opinion which I oppose, since all Errours are not equal, neither ought the Punishment: What Rule hath our Saviour left, or can any Man imagine by which to propor­tion the Punishments which are of many sorts and degrees; in­deed the Pope, as if he would supply what Christ left defec­tive, makes his own Definitions and Decrees, the Rule whereby to judg of Heresy; and his own arbitrary Will, the Standard of its Punishment; being in that directly Antichrist, i. e. contrary to Christ.

Now if Christ hath not commanded, they are surely too of­ficious that will offer violence to any Man for his sake, and may expect their Reward from him that set them on work, non amo nimiùm diligentes.

[Page 5] But to prosecute this Argument further, it is clear that there is nothing to be alledged from the Current of the Gospel, so that the Adversary is constrained to glean up a Scrap or two; I think there was hardly ever any thing alledged from our Savi­our's own Words, except some few have trifled from those Words, Luke 14. 23. Compel them to come in; which are part of a Parable, and according to the scope of it to be understood of importunate preaching; for surely the Apostles were not Ma­sters of the Temporal Sword▪ the word is in the Greek [...], which is best understood of urgent Invitation, and most proper to bring such as are there spoken of to his Supper. Paul useth the same word of Perswasion and Example, Gal. 2. 14. Why compellest thou the Gentiles to live as do the Jews? So likewise little is to be alledged from the Apostle's words, but from some general Expressions, and by consequence, as thus, it may be ob­jected, That though the Apostles could not punish so, as being no Magistrates, yet Peter denounced God's Judgments against Ananias and Sapphira, Acts 5.

1. I answer, first, That is without the state of the Que­stion; for that was in a criminal Cause, of Lying, Dissembling, Purloining, Sacriledg, Vow-breaking; and I will not deny but Hereticks may be punished for the like Faults, when they can be proved against them, as they use to be against other Men: Ananias and Sapphira might be Orthodox enough as to any point of Doctrine.

2. What Peter did by extraordinary Inspiration and miracu­lous Infliction upon some particular Persons, is no Rule for un­inspired Men to go by in ordinary cases Magistrates being some­times young Men and Women, and of small Learning in the Scriptures, and which is worse, often wicked Men and Here­ticks themselves by ill Education, Interest and Practice.

This may answer to that which was said of them who were delivered over to Satan, and that Paul saith of the Judaizers, I would they were cut off that trouble you, Gal. 5. 1, 2. viz. as Dr. Duport expounded at St. Maries in Cambridg, that God would cut them off, which yet may be meant of Excommunica­tion, as in ver. 10. And the Apostle who was no Magistrate, and ver. 11. suffered Perfecution, was very unlikely to per­swade the Galatian Magistrates to persecute. 'Tis also certain that those Judaizers were Men full of moral Impiety, and Per­secutors of others.

[Page 6] The same Answer may serve for them who were blamed, Rev. 2. 20. for suffering Jezabel the false Prophetess to seduce; but to what? viz. to Fornication and Idolatry. Moreover, what Toleration is here blamed, is easily proved by this, that the Christians were then no Magistrates, but were by sound Do­ctrine to have stopped the Mouths, and convinced Gain-sayers by the Sword of the Spirit, which is the Word of God; and if the seven Churches be prophetical, as hath of late been ve­ry well proved, we know who they were that had the tempo­ral Sword, and how well they managed it in the Thyatirian In­terval; they were certainly damnable Hereticks, and such as deserved to be punished for their innumerable Crimes, if they had had their due.

As an Appendix to this Argument, let it be considered, that the Apostles and Primitive Christians being accounted Hereticks by the generality of Men, were very unlikely to have put such a Sword into the hands of their Enemies, as to teach them that He­reticks were to be punished by the Civil Magistrate.

And our Saviour Christ laying the Foundation of his Church in his own Blood, and the Blood of his Apostles and Disciples, was very unlikely to prescribe a way for the shedding the Blood of his Enemies by a judicial Trial in humane Courts, for that wherein their Consciences were thorowly satisfied as true and good, and therefore must needs think themselves honest and in­nocent, and the Christians unjust and inhumane, notwithstand­ing all their preaching up of Meekness, and the Example of the most meek and merciful Jesus, who endured such Contradi­ction of Sinners against himself; what had that been but to dis­grace the Glory of Christian Martyrdom, as when our Saviour biddeth Peter to put up his Sword, Matth. 26. 52. he giveth this reason, For they that take the Sword, shall perish by the Sword; intimating nothing of real worth and excellency in the Suffer­ings of Christians by the Sword, if themselves should take the Sword as a matter but of quid pro quo. He wanted not more effectual Souldiers to have made use of against his Persecutors, viz. whole Legions of Angels.

II. I argue from Divine Authority affirmatively, Our Saviour doth condemn Persecution in meer Causes of Religion in that Parable of the Tares, Matth. 13. and so Chrysostom, Austin, and others both ancient and modern have expounded the place. [Page 7] The Reapers are to be Angels, not Men; those Words, Let them grow together, cannot forbid Excommunication, and there­fore, Let them grow together, must forbid temporal Excision; and if that should be taken only to signify eventually, that there would be Tares to the End of the World, yet there is a good Argument in the Caution, ver. 29. Lest while ye gather the Tares, ye root up the Wheat also; for though Men may think that they can distinguish clearly enough betwixt. Tares and Wheat in some cases of Heresy, yet as wise Men as they have found themselves deceived, Acts 26. 9. And let Men give way to judicial Proceedings in this kind, and the Ignorance and Rashness of Men will pluck up ten Orthodox Professors for one Heretick, I am sure they have hither to pluck'd up many more▪ Now in Civil Causes there is not the like danger, wherein the Criminals own Consciences accuse them for the most part, and they cannot deny the justness of the Law, but deny their own particular Fact; which made St. Cyprian say to Demetrian, Pro­consul of Africa, Torqueri enim debui si negarem—nunc autem cum sponte confitear, &c. quid tormenta admoves confitenti?

2. Consider also how our Saviour rebuked his Disciples when they called for Fire from Heaven upon the Samaritans who re­ceived him not when his Face was as though he would go to Je­rusalme, Luke 9. 55. Ye know not what manner of Spirit ye are of; i. e. how unsuitable these killing Spirits or Dispositions of yours are to the Times of the Gospel, or that the Times of the Go­spel require you to be of other Dispositions; see Dr. Hammond in loc. It is manifest that our Saviour opposeth not fault to fault, as if the Samaritans fault was less deserving Punishment; nor doth it appear that he opposeth the private Passions of his Dis­ciples, as Desire of Revenge, or the like, to the publick Spirit of Elias, but he opposeth the Severity of legal Times to the eminent and extraordinary Grace of the Times of the Gospel, as appears by the words following, ver. 56. For the Son of Man is not come to destroy Mens Lives, but to save them; as if he had said, Ye must not be so prodigal of Mens Lives, now the Savi­our of the World is come to lay down his own Life for the ran­som of other Mens.

3. Some also argue from those words of the Apostle, 2 Cor. 10. 4. For the Weapons of our Warfare are not carnal; where tho the word carnal doth signify weak, as the word Flesh is often [Page 8] used [...]gnify Weakness, yet the words do imply that the Chri­stians Weapons are spiritual and of another sort distinct from those which worldly Souldiers use.

III. My next Argument is drawn à Regulâ Fidei, from the Rule of Faith, viz. the Scriptures; it is not proper to say that the Scripture is Judex Controversiarum, the Judg of Controver­sies, but it is Norma Fidei, the Rule of Faith; this I take here for granted. Now this Rule is too hard to be understood to be introduced into humane Courts for civil coaction by temporal Punishments; for unto the right determination of many Que­stions in Religion the Scriptures must be well translated, various Copies must be consulted, Figures of Speech must be known, and the Idiom or Properiety of Language with many obsolete Cu­stoms, the Analogy of Religion, the Context and Coherence of Words, comparing Scripture with Scripture, are to be minded, besides many Prejudices from diversity of Interpreta­tions, Authority, Education and Company, &c. must be con­sidered; all which make it so easy for a Man to be mistaken, as to exempt his Error from the cognizance and animad version of humane Courts by civil coercion; they who are the great Per­secutors, when they please, and it serves their turns, can make large declamations of the Obscurity of Scripture, even to lit­tle better than Blasphemy and Atheism, saying it is but a Lea­den Rule, a Nose of Wax, and yet see not what a horrible fol­ly and detestable Impiety it is to quote Scripture to an fro, whe­ther a Man shall be burnt? as many poor, honest, innocent Men, yea even Women, were in Queen Mary's Days, after the Doctors had disputed of Hoc est corpus meum: and whether Hoc was an individuum vagum or no? If these things had been only ridicu­lous, they might have been born, but tending to so much Mis­chief and Murder, they were intolerable.

Here it's like some will say, That although some things are dark and hard to be understood, yet other things are plain and easy, namely Fundamentals.

I answer, Many things may be evident enough to make Men obnoxious to God's Judgment, which is always according to Truth, and yet not make Men liable to Mens Judgment, who sometimes are very apt to swim with the Stream of the Times, and call every little thing Heresy, and who cannot as yet agree what is fundamental, and how many Fundamentals there be. [Page 9] Some say that in the Christian Religion there is only this one, viz. That Jesus is the Christ, and such other things are only ne­cessary, without which this Article cannot be retained; but what they are is hard to say.

Neither can we tell how far God will forbear Mens Mistakes about things which in themselves are damning: so was Circum­cision, if retained as necessary, even to the Jews; for Paul says, Gal. 5. 2, 3. If ye be circumcised, &c. for I testify again to every one that is circumcised, that he is a Debtor to the whole Law; yet was this Error tolerated a great while, and some judicious Men think that Paul never intended this Sentence to be so compre­hensive, as to anathematize universally all, even weak Jews, who might mistake out of Tenderness and Infirmity. Add to this, That many understanding and charitable Men have thought and do think, that negative unbelief even of that capital Article, doth not certainly exclude all the Heathens from Salvation, tho ('tis true) they are therefore out of the way, viz. the Road­way, the authorized way of Salvation, to say nothing that (Acts 19.) there were some called Disciples, who did not know whe­ther there was any holy Spirit or no; which take it in what sense you will, was requisite to Christian Baptism; and we do see as much difficulty, and there hath been as much Controversy in Articles thought fundamental, as in others remoter from the Foundation; and 'tis certain by 2 Pet. 3. 16. that some Scri­ptures are hard to be understood, which yet are of that mo­ment, that Mens Salvation are concerned in the right under­standing of them.

IV. My fourth Argument shall be taken à naturâ Fidei, from the Nature of Faith, and the things which are revealed, which are spiritual and supernatural; Faith is in an eminent manner the Gift of God; and the natural Man receiveth not spiritual things, for they are spiritually discerned, and so far transcend­ing Mens ordinary Reason, that they cannot be the matter of humane Courts: for example, take the great Article of the Resurrection of Christ: Our Saviour's own Apostles, who had conversed with him, and seen all his Miracles, and although he had told them before of his Resurrection, yet were very slow to believe them who had seen him after he was risen; and Thomas would not believe except he might see, therefore these things cannot be the matter of the Magistrates Courts: for who [Page 10] will say that a Man is to be punished for denying that which is so very hard to be believed by by a meer animal Man, and much less ought a Man to be punished for believing it may be, but part of a great spiritual Truth; I instance in this Article, because it being one of the principal Articles of our Religion, my Ar­gument holds à fortiori, in matters of lesser Consequence, the Truth and Virtue whereof for the most part depend upon this Article and the belief thereof; which it self depended in great part upon the Testimony of faithful Men, and still must be supposed harder in that respect for them who never saw nor spake with the Apostles themselves, who did so testify, there­fore our Saviour saith, Blessed are they who have not seen, and have believed.

Thus Baptism and the Lord's Supper can signify nothing ex­cept the Resurrection of Christ be supposed true and certain, and if a Man be supposed to deny the Resurrection of Christ, he may be supposed to deny the use of Baptism and the Lord's Supper, as wholly signifying nothing; and of no use or benefit to him; and much less are Men to inflict temporal Punishment upon him, if he misbelieve only as to some circumstances of them: Shall misbelief of Christ's Presence in the Lord's Sup­per be punished, and unbelief of Christ's Presence in Heaven not punishable? As one said wittily, that the Italians would burn a Man for not believing Christ's real and Bodily Presence in the Sacrament, whenas themselves did not believe him to be in Heaven. It is much which Evagrius saith, lib. 1. c. 15. That Synesius was desired by the Christians to accept of the Priestly Function, although he did not admit the Article of the Resur­rection, nor would be brought to believe the same out of cha­ritable hopes for the future, that he would discern the Truth after a while. Much more are Men to be suffered to enjoy their Lives and Liberties, how indisposed soever they may seem to believe out of charitable hopes; when as they may be very skilful to till the Ground, or exercise some mechanical Trade, and so be very useful to the Commonwealth, and fit to live in it. Education indeed tends much to make the Truth easy to be believed; but it will do as much for an Error, and so far as a Man believes meerly for that cause, his Faith must needs be of little avail, however I will not deny but that with other cir­cumstances, as divulging before such Persons, in such time, in [Page 11] such place, with such Impudence and Effrontery, may turn a Man's Fault into a Crime, and make it reducible to an Error against natural Light; possibly a Man may be justly punished for preaching the Truth, as suppose to rail against Transub­stantiation in a Sermon before the King of Spain, or call Maho­met a damnable Impostor to the Grand Signiour's face.

Though the Jews are not within the design of this Trea­tise, yet I think this Argument proves that they are to have their Liberty if they live peaceably, without impudently af­fronting the Christians.

As an additional Supplement to this Argument, let me add these two things.

1. First, That Faith is the Substance of Things hoped for, the Evidence of Things not seen; and God would have our Faith to contain in it these difficulties, without which it would lose its real worth and value, the Object whereof would not be as now it is, a Touch-stone and Trial of true Grace and Godliness be­fore God who searcheth the Heart and Reins, and whose Judg­ment is according to Truth, and to whom it is therefore fit the Judgment of Matters of Faith should be remitted.

2. The other is, That no Man hath been thought fit to be punished, for not performing the supernatural and perfect Pre­cepts of Christ in the most perfect way of Charity, in giving and forgiving, which yet is more necessary to Salvation than Faith is; and therefore why should any Man be punished for not believing, or believing amiss, concerning the supernatural Doctrines of Christ. As for that which some say of forcing the external not internal Acts of Faith, I shall speak to that af­terward.

V. My fifth Argument is drawn ab axiomate; viz. from that received Axiom, Dominium non fundatur in Gratiâ, that Do­minion is not founded in Grace; which I know to be chie [...]ly understood of Soveraignty: But there is a gradual Parity of the Reason upon which that Axiom is founded, which may be reciprocally applied to Subjects: for Pagans though they canno [...] be lawful Dispensers of the Mysteries of Christ, nor Heirs of the Kingdom of Heaven, yet they may be lawful Kings, and lawful Subjects, lawful Husbands, lawful Masters, and lawful Possessors of their Lives, Liberties and Estates. Christian Re­ligion doth not allow Servants to deny Obedience to their [Page 12] Masters according to the Flesh, except they may be made free; nor Masters to turn away their Servants contrary to their Covenants; nor ought Christian Magistrates to deny Protection to whom it is due, though they be not Christians, and perhaps was due before either of them was Christian. What might a good moral Heathen say, if your Christianity stirreth you up either to tyrannize or to rebel sor causes of mere Religion:

Indeed Errors in Religion may have such intolerable Inju­ry mixt with them, as may excuse if not free both the one and the other, but I speak of merely Religious Errors.

It is true wicked Men want the Blessing of God to them up­on what they possess; they have not a sanctified use of things, but they have a lawful Title, and 'tis as much Theft to steal from them as the best Godly Men in the World. And therefore Heresy can be no sufficient ground to dispossess any Man of what he hath, for that can only denominate a Man not Godly or Gracious, or to be no excellent Person; but Men are not to be punished by the Civil Sword, because they are not excellent Persons. It is generally thought that Soveraign Authority, be it as absolute as it will, is founded at least in implicite pact or trust, which was necessary in all Nations before Christia­nity came into the World, and when it did, it was not in the Christian Power to betrust that, nor is it likely that the Com­munity would trust their temporal Rights with the contingent Opinions of their Governours, and therefore that bloody per­secuting Opinion must needs it self be an Heresy with moral Impiety mixt with it, and intolerable, as being at Inlet to Thie­very and Tyranny on the one Hand, and Rebellion on the other.

And we see by Experience that the principal Hyperaspists and Defenders of the bloody Tenent, I mean the Papists, do not stick to rebel against, to depose and murther Heretical Princes merely for Religion, as they are encouraged to do by the Decrees of their Popes and Councils, by which whether Kings or Subjects they are bound the one to persecute, the other to rebel in case of Heresy, though no Civil Injury be offered, whatsoever Oaths they may have taken.

[Page 13] Here it may be objected, that what Persecutors do now is ac­cording to Law.

I answer, no humane Authority can justly make such Acts of Sequestration or Confiscation, or impose Fines, much less such unreasonable Fines, as they are wont to do for things merely Religious; what is that else but to establish Iniquity by a Law? then they say they do not force Men to embrace the Faith, but punish Relapsers. I answer, that Men are forced into Opinions by Law and Fear of Punishment, or are surprized by Educa­tion and Custom before they are able or fit to judg, or are de­ceived by the plausible reasons of abler Men, without hearing what other Men could say to the contrary. And then if any Man was to be free from Punishment before he turned, he ought to be as free to return, except some sufficient cause in Nature or Reason could be shown to dissolve his Right in the one case more than in the other; to relapse indeed for any by, or world­ly ends, is a great Sin in the sight of God, and fit for him to judg of, whose Judgment is according to Truth. There are a great many things both in Doctrine and Discipline for which some are very zealous, but the greatest part do so little under­stand or apply their minds to understand, that they may turn and return ten times over, for what they know, and yet the Zealots will engage them to be of their sides; as for the great Persecutors their talk of Relapse is but a Pretence, for they per­secute all of all sorts.

Again it may be objected, that now the Ministers Ecclesiasti­cal Preferments may be endangered by Heretical Doctrine, which Preferments are settled by Law.

I answer, that that Settlement cannot be good so far as it abridgeth any Man, or deprives him of that Right which is vested in him by the Law of Nature, which is for the Parishio­ner to have his Freedom in matters of Religion, as well as the Rector of the Parish, who turns a just Reward into Oppression and Bribery, when he useth it to another Mans Wrong, what ever Declamations or Defamations such Men may make for their own ends. I answer further, that the Ministers spiritual Title is founded in Grace, viz. for a certain spiritual use, which when the Office proves needless or vain, the Title falls of it self, because the Foundation is sunk away from it. Now though in the present Objection we suppose the Office well [Page 14] founded and terminated in a good use, yet in those Offices which are not essential to Civil Government, in order to the tem­poral Weal of the Publique, but founded in Grace for spiritual ends, the Usefulness whereof is best judged by such as are spiri­tual, the Right is likewise best judged by them also, and to be reputed but as doubtful and disputable as to others, and con­sequently it cannot be an Offence so great, and of the same Nature to deny that Right, to oppose it or undermine it as it is to oppose Civil Natural Right, which is all the World over un­questionable, especially when that Religious Right is but re­motely endangered, and not actually opposed by Sedition or o­ther Endeavours without the Command of the Soveraign Au­thority, paying all Dues in the mean time according to Law. If a Petition was preferred to the Parliament that our Prelates who in this Latitude of Diocess are indeed Arch-Bishops, might be made without any new Ordination, by Patent or Commission only; and before they enter upon their Offices, be bound to declare that they do not hold their Jurisdiction in that Latitude to be jure divino, viz. as distinct from Presbyters or such parochial Bishops as watch over the Souls of the People; and that the Means of the Church might be brought into a common stock, and more equally distributed, as they in their Wis­dom shall think fit: the Petitioner in the mean time paying their Duties till such Determination of the Soveraign Authority. I see not how they could be justly blamed for such a Petition.

VI. My sixth Argument shall be drawn ab absurdo, from the absurd Consequences which follow that detestable Opinion of forcing Mens Consciences, to say nothing that the National Churches are yet very imperfectly reformed, and therefore ve­ry unlikely to manage the Sword well, some of them punishing one thing and some another, and some of them in the same Church in divers times punishing diversly, as several parties ac­cidentally get into Authority.

The Sword will cut only the Honest and Consciencious who dare not dissemble; the rest for the most part will temporize and run home again, when they see their Opportunity, and re­venge themselves upon them who were so rough with them, and shamed them so much; and this temporizing and turning, merely for lucres sake and to save themselves, makes Religion very ridiculous, and weakens the Repute and Authority of the [Page 15] Professors, as but Atheists and Men of no real Religion; as truly the Atheists have the Advantage of all Men in this Re­gard, for to be sure their Consciences are not so scrupulous, but they can subscribe to every thing, they can dissemble and comply for their own ends with all Times and Parties, yea and under the Disguise of Religion help to make all true Religion odious, by persecuting Men as Hereticks and Schismaticks, not because they have no Religion, but because they have (as they think) too much, and are religious in good earnest, and then these Men applaud themselves, and think they have got a great Argument for their Atheism, when they see other Men make Religion but a Daunce after the Pipe of the Times.

Then to force Men to the Service of God makes often but Hyprocites, whose presence there should be voluntary, or else it is neither acceptable to God, who requires the Heart; nor to good Men, who must needs desire the greatest Unanimi­ty and Freedom of Consent that may be, in their joynt Ad­dresses to the Throne of Grace, which in worldly things is otherwise; for if a Man doth not pay his Debts with a good Will, it matters not, so the Creditor be paid, he is satisfied.

Again, except the Persecutions be more severe than good Na­tures can endure to execute, and the Sectaries but few, they either make Sects or make the Sectaries obstinate, who other­wise might come to the publique Assemblies, were they not exasperated by the Violence of them, who would bring them thither and their Rigioties, when they come there. Now how should they worship God together, who are Persecutors one of another, who bite and devour each other, and for that Reason can hardly think one another to be Christians, as indeed a Perse­cutor will have much ado to defend himself to be a true Chri­stian, as great a Zealot as he may take himself to be for the Chri­stian Religion. Likewise Persecution gives way to the Rabble to deride and insult over Men much better than themselves, and to other Men to get some part of a base Livelihood by informing, or to vent their private Malice and Revenge upon old Grudges, and the Heats and Inflammations of Disputation, that so they may have their Wills over them whom they could not overcome in Controversy also to the Cruelty of covetous Men, who are too timerous of losing their own Preferments, or lurch a [...] other Mens.

[Page 16] Then it often makes Magistrates but the Ministers Executioners, and that in things which they neither understand, nor have reason to understand from their Age, Sex, manner of Educati­on, meanness of Parts, Passion, Employment, &c. and which they who study all their Lives (and as far as we know without prejudice) cannot agree about, and in things which Magi­strates have no reason to trust other Men, as they may in Phy­sick, and Civil Causes. In what a horrid manner was Q. Mary abused by the Priests? And I have read in the Life of King Ed­ward the 6th, that when Archbishop Cranmer urged him to sign the Warrant for the burning Joan Butcher an Arian, the King vehemently refused, but at last yielded through much importu­nity, saying it was Cranmer's doing, and he should answer for it, which the Historian saith brought him under Censure, he be­ing afterward burnt himself for an Heretick. If they make themselves suspicious who choose to sell their Wares in a dark Shop, what do they do who sell them by the Light of such Fires? The Lord Falkland and Dr. Hammond excuse the Protestants from much of this barbarous Cruelty, confessing a little to be too much. To this Head I may reduce an Argument ab incom­modo; as that it makes the Magistrates to make themselves par­ties in the Factions of their Subjects, and many times run needless Hazards from the ill humours of their People; and makes the several Parties to bandie against one another, and a­gainst the Government; which will make work enough for the wisest Man in the World, to know how to govern such unruly People, who are always striving to get the Civil Sword into their Hands, not for common Defence, but to oppress their Antagonists, often quarrelling about Questions, in themselves perhaps not very material to Religion, which have been long disputed, and may be disputed sine fine, as the Controversies about Free-Will, Election and Reprobation have been. Nor is it for the Magistrates Interest, that Men who might live use­fully in the Common-Wealth should be kept in Jails for disci­plinary notions in Religion, which are uncertain, or manifest­ly false, supposing Men to be Churches, or pure Churches, which are not so: like making Shoes for all Men by one Last, and the same Prayers to serve for Men of contrary Tempers, and in contrary Circumstances, as we have lately experien­ced.

[Page 17] It destroys trading, when Men cannot go freely about their business, and lay out their Stocks with security; nor dare Neighbours freely lend Monies to others, for fear they should be beggared by Religious Fines.

Lastly, It could not reasonably be expected that Reformati­on from such a huge mass of Errors and Confusion should be perfected simul & semel; but though all Reformers cannot a­gree in their Judgments about some weighty things in Doctrine and Discipline, yet except they make account all to be destroy­ed by the common Enemy, it is most certainly the Interest of all who have departed from the Roman Pontific, to join all to­gether as one Man, (so far should they be from persecuting one the other) and say, I am as thou art, my Horses as thy Horses, &c. Which I say, not to propagate the true Faith by Force, but by such honest and lawful means as God hath wonderfully put into their Hands, to defend themselves against their bloody and implacable Adversaries, who have lately appeared in their Colours, and gone about to destroy all the Northern Here­ticks with a Vengeance, as it is phrased by a late learned Au­thor of a Treatise concerning Civil and Ecclesiastical Laws, who hath displayed the Cruelty of their Decrees and Canons, and clearly proved that there is no trusting to their Words, Promises or Oaths.

VII. My Seventh and last Argument shall be taken ab Autho­ritate Ecclesiae affirmativè, from the Authority of Christians both ancient and modern; the Antient Christians generally denied the Persecution of Hereticks, for at least well nigh the first 400 years: for which there are well-known Testimonies cited out of Tertullian, Lactantius, &c. that Faith is to be perswaded, not forced. St. Austin is very express contra Cresconium Gra [...] maticum, l. 3. c. 50. Nullis bonis in Catholicâ hoc placet, [...] usque ad mortem in quenquam licet haereticum saeviatur; It pleaseth no good Men in the Catholick Church, that Hereticks should be put to Death. This Testimony sheweth not his private Opi­nion, but the Judgment of the Univers [...]l Church; which no Man knew better than he, and strongly proves that the Papists are neither the Catholick Church, nor good Men, for he saith, Nullis bonis hoc placet, & in Catholicâ; but it is no wonder for Apostates to alledg the whole Primitive Church as for them, [Page 18] when it is all against them. This place is quoted by Bishop Jewel, Apol. c. 32. Div. 1. p. 431. who cites also Chrysostom Ho­mil. 19. in Matth. Num Ovis persequitur Lupum Christianus haere­ticum? &c. Doth the Sheep persecute the Wolf? No, but the Wolf doth persecute the Sheep: Doth the Christian per­secute the Heretick? No, but the Heretick doth persecute the Christian. And again, Whomsoever you see rej [...]icing in the Blood of Persecution, he is the Wolf, and wisheth that God would kill the Heretick with spiritual Darts, and the two­edged Sword of the Spirit.

Eusebius relates in Vitâ Constantini, that Constantine decreed, that they which erred should have equal fruition of Peace and Quiet with the Faithful; and that we may know Constantine was in earnest, he puts it into his Prayer, l. 2. c. 55. It is true he banished Arius, but he banished likewise Athanasius, and neither of them for their Opinions, (which he accounted trifling: and Bp. Jewel saith, in Apol. c. 3. Div. 2. p. 524. was thought to encline in his own Opinion, rather to Arius) but for other Causes and Immoralities, and unchristian Contentions, not to be reconciled by the Emperours Tears, Letters, and the Mediation of his Legate Hosius Bishop of Corduba. This is cer­tain, that Athanasians, Arians, and Novatians, were all suffer­ed in the same Cities, to have Churches and Bishops of their own, whose Successions are delivered in Ecclesiastical History, till Pope Celestine banished the Novatians out of Rome, depri­ved them of their Churches, and constrained Rusticula their Bishop to raise private Conventicles, anno 425. Socrates Schol. l. 7. c. 11. For now he and Cyril of Alexandria were grown [...]reat, having gone beyond the Bounds of Priesthood, and got­ten the temporal Sword.

He that would see more of Antiquity may consult Mr. Daillé of the right use of the Fathers, and read the Comments of the Fathers upon the Parable of the Tares, &c.—Ye know not what Spirit ye are of. I shall add some modern Testimonies of our own Country-men.

The Apology of the Church of England, set out by Authori­ty, p. 431. mihi. ‘As for us we run not to the Fire, as these Mens Guise is, but we run to the Scriptures; neither do we reason with the Sword, but with the Word of God.’ Indeed the [Page 19] Writ de Haeretico comburendo, is now out of Doors, and I hope his Fellow de Excommunicato capiendo, will follow him ere long: See Dr. Hammond in his Defence of my Lord Falkland, who writes very fully to this Purpose, but especially see his last Words about Paedobaptism in his six Queries.

His Words are— ‘And God forbid we that desire to reduce Dissenters—should ever think of damning, killing, or per­secuting any that dissent in this or any other particular.—And I think it but Duty to pray against that treacherous Prosperity, which should be able to infuse any greater Degree of Unkind­ness or Roughness into the Minds of Men, whether Sons or Fathers of the Church, than what I here avow to be strict Du­ty in every Christian.’ Dr. Taylour, since Bishop of Down and Conner, wrote a whole Book de Libertate Prophetandi; the like hath been done by several Conformists in their Pleas for Non­conformists. Mr. Hudson who rode with King Charles the first in Disguise, in his Treatise of Monarchy, &c. dedicated to the King, asserts Liberty of Conscience boldly, and perhaps too boldly; but that it was Mr. Hudson, who carried his Life in his Hand, and at last lost it in the King's Cause.

See what Dr. More in his Appendix to his Antidote against Idolatry, saith—p. 55. of Nadab and Abihu's offering strange Fire before the Lord, Lev. 10. 1. where he compares it with Luke 9. 54. John 16. 2. and saith—Whether Protestants or Papists that kill one the other for conscientious Diffe­rence in Religion, as thinking [...] to make an Oblation of Divine Worship to God thereby, do turn the living God of the Christians (who is Love it self) into the foulest Idols of the Heathens, who used to be worshipped with the bloody sacrificing of Men.

This holds good in Proportion against Religious Robbery, by Fines, or Confiscation of Goods. Mr. Day on Isa. 1. 21. saith, that to take away Mens Livelihood is there called Murther.

Lastly, To name no more, Dr. Burnet hath written very learnedly and solidly in Defence of Liberty of Conscience, in his Preface to the History of the persecuting Emperours.

Now from what hath been said, appears the Vanity of those Men who are content to give a private Liberty, but no [...] to) assemble; which signifies little to many Men, who think them­selves [Page 20] bound to do so from Heb. 10. 25. and not to live like Atheists.

Others will give Men Liberty, if they will hold their Tongues, and distinguish betwixt the outward Exercise or Profession of Faith, and the internal Acts of Faith, which they say are not to be forced; thank them for nothing, did the primitive Church only tolerate the Thoughts of Hereticks; and who can think any sober Man should dispute of Mens private Thoughts, which as such no Man can know, or if they be declared and punished, yet cannot a Man certainly say that they are forced, viz. that his Thoughts are altered, for that may be dissembled, but all Men have hitherto supposed that Mens Consciences are capable of being forced, that is punished, taking the inward and outward Acts together as they ought in this Question: some I see would give such a Liberty as Antichrist never de­nied.

Now it may be fit to answer the principal Arguments, which are produced by the Adversaries:

1. From Rom. 13. where Magistrates are said to be a Terror to evil-Doers, &c.

I answer, that Text only authorizeth the Magistrate to pu­nish civil Injuries and moral Evils. He may punish Treason, Rebellion, Murther, &c. Such Heresies are Works of the Flesh, and against the Light of Nature, such as the Apostle mentions, Gal. 5. 20. and what they are may be known by their Compa­nions there enumerated; that the Apostle doth not speak of Errors in the Faith, is plain, because the Magistrates were then Heathens, and he seems to speak of the present Powers, when he saith (The Powers that be, &c.) though 'tis true he speaks of them rather according to what they ought to be, than accor­ding to what they were, as may appear by those Words, He is the Minister of God to thee for good, which some in alledging this Scripture do little consider; Doth the Apostle make Caligu­l [...], and Nero, and Commodus, with the whole Tribe of Usurpers Judges of the Faith of Christians? and therefore Paul could appeal to Caesar only, whether there was any Immorality or Crime in him deserving Death, as the Jews caluminated.

2. It is objected, that the King is bound to serve God, not only as a Man, but as a King.

[Page 21] I answer, It is true, and that may be done without Violation of Conscience in matters of Faith: He may punish Immoralities, Impieties, and such as sin against their Profession and Conscience; He may serve God by Protection of his Church, by his Trea­sure, Munificence, praising and encouraging good Christians, without bribing Men by extravagant Rewards, and Wages, which bear no Proportion to the Work, by good Perswasions and Advice, by his Wisdom in calling Councils, and presiding in them; and by defending even honest and well-meaning Here­ticks from such cruel Men, as put honest Men into Bear-Skins, and then set the Dogs on them, and care not what censure they pass upon Dissenters: so lavish are they in calling every little thing Heresy, Blasphemous and Damnable; of which Chrysostom complains as too rife in his time, in his Comment on Matthew; but these Men learnt that Language of Antichrist the old Anathematizer.

Some urge the Power of the Kings of Israel, in 2. Chron. 15. 13. That whosoever would not seek the Lord God of Israel, should be put to Death. But this is already answered in Pro­pos. 2d.

3. Some say, if Liberty of Conscience be granted, there will be Confusion.

I answer, This is a Selfish Objection, for I dare say the Ob­jector would not use it, if he stood in need of Liberty him­self. Unity and Uniformity are good things, but we must come honestly by them.

I am for Unity, but as Bp. Latimer said, Unity in Verity, and not in Popery. There is Unity enough amonst Mahumetans in Spain and Muscovie, and yet in Reality there is the greatest Babylonical Confusion, (that is) mixture of Truth and Er­ror, which is the Mother of the greatest Dissension; for when­soever the Force shall be taken off, (as is fit) there must of ne­cessity be the greatest Differences; when Men shall use their own Judgments from proper Arguments, and not as now one Judg for them all, right or wrong at Adventures: then it will appear that he who pretends himself most infallible, and other Men to be Hereticks, is most deceived and the greatest D [...]cei­ver and Heretick of all, as 'tis usual with them to be; who most of all cry out upon other Men as Hereticks and S [...]hisma­ticks, [Page 23] to be indeed such themselves; and if Hereticks were to be punished, they deserve most of all to be punished.

4. Some say, If Liberty of Conscience be granted, that then there can be no National Church.

I answer, Was there then no National Church for the first three hundred Years before the Emperor received the Faith?

It is true, there can be none with Coercion to it, nor should there be any such.

What National Church can there be where the major part of the Nation are Infidels or Papists? What Parochial Church, where the major part of the Parish are such?

What National Churches can there be, where the Soveraign Authorities are Infidel or Popish? must they appoint the Bi­shops? They are (sure) like to be good ones!

Constantine would set up no such National Church, but suffer­ed Arians, Novatians, and others to have their Churches and Bishops. And Mr. Heylin saith there were Bishops in Poland, but no Man forced by the Civil Sword, and Bishops could uphold, when the Emperours were against them: but now we think as good no Bishop, if all that live within such a part of the Country be not forced to be subject to him, as being in his Dio­cess.

That Church may be said to be National, when the most are of it, and especially when the Soveraign Authority doth countenance it, doth establish and encourage it by favourable Laws and Priviledges.

The best way to make a National Church, was by such heal­ing Principles as these.

For Magistrates to command as little as may be, and People to obey as much as they can; besides the Test against Popery, to require as little to be subscibed to as is possible, and that in the words of the Scripture.

To let the Parishes where the Fault is committed to examine and censure gross and notoriously scandalous Offendors; and order the needful Rites and Ceremonies of their own Church, without chargeable Travelling, tedious Suits, crafty Pleadings, Quirks of Law, and Pettefoggeries, Fees and Charges, Extortion and Barretry in forreign Courts, who [Page 22] indeed have nothing to do in such matters not easily to impose a Pastor upon a Pa­rish without their Consent;The Antients thought it fit the Crime should be judged where it was commited. nor a Presi­dent Bishop upon his Clergy without their Consent.

And he with the chief of them to ordain Ministers, and see that they who receive the Magistrates Maintenance, do the Work accordingly. I am so far from being against Bishops, that where there is one, I would there were many more.

5. Others say, Why do they then deny the Papists Liber­ty?

(1.) Because the Papists are gross Idolaters against Natu­ral Light.

(2.) Because the Papists will give no Liberty. And if they do promise it and swear it, by virtue of the Decrees of Popes and Councils, they must not perform it longer than the Pope pleaseth, if they will be true to their Reli­gion.

(3.) Because the Papists introduce a Foreign Power, viz. the Pope with his Locusts, to burthen the Land, and e­munge the People, and cheat them of their Money; and therefore no more tolerable than Regraters or Forestallers, &c.

(4.) Because the Papists, where they get full Power, are unmeasurably cruel. Bishop Bramhall against Militeir saith, that they have equalled, if not exceeded, the Heathens in Cruelty, and now of late they have outdone themselves, wit­ness their Dragooning in France and Savoy, and the like in other places. Otherwise,

The Papists are not to be punished as Hereticks: Queen Elizabeth and our Kings do expresly deny, that they puni­shed them meerly for their Religion: Indeed our Laws were very cruel against them, but never executed in any very high degree; and as to any great Violence or Seve­rity, I wish they were so moderated as to be fit to be executed, and with consideration of all mollifying Cir­cumstances, and not one Man to suffer for the Offence of another.

[Page 24] IV. My fourth and last Conclusion is this, An erroneous and heretical Conscience is not free in things meerly Re­ligious, from the Judgments of God, nor from the Cen­sures of the Church by Admonition and Excommunicati­on, in Causes purely Ecclesiastical, where there is any gross scandal or danger by the Leaven of Infection; for these two were the chief Causes of Excommunication in the Pri­mitive Church, and that chiefly in case of moral Impie­ties, which now are or should be carefully look'd to by the Christian Magistrate; and therefore we have now so much the less need of Excommunication, our Neighbours who may be offended, being also Christians as well as we; as likewise neither have we so great need of Deacons and De­conesses, now our Sick and Poor are provided for by the Chri­stian Magistrates; however it is still of very good use, if it be managed by the Church where the Crime is com­mitted, and who are best able to judg, and not by For­reigners, nor buoying Men up to Obstinacy for every lit­tle thing, for Fees and Groat-matters. Now though Ex­communication be concerned only in gross things, yet the Conscience is bound to Obedience, not only to the Ordi­nances of Christ, but even to the laudable Rites and Or­ders of that particular Church, where a Man liveth or converseth, or to the Churches as associated for Order and Concord-sake, without Infringement on the Rights of particular Congregations or Churches, or to the Customs of the Church, whi [...]h are useful, at least not—hurtful, as is undeniably proved from St. Paul's Discourse of Womens vailing their Faces, 1 Cor. 11. and by his Discourse of speaking with Tongues, 1 Cor. 14. and truly if a Man doth not profess himself unsatisfied as to the Lawfulness of such Customs or Ceremonies, which are pretended to be but for the Decency of the Administration of the Service of God, I for my part take it to be a Peevishness and Crossness not to observe them; and to be over-scrupulous, is but to be su­perstitious, on the one hand, as some under Pretence of Obedience to Authority in indifferent things, have been too rigorous, offending as grosly against Rom. 14. as the Pa­pists [Page 25] by Latin Prayers do against 1 Cor. 14. these following Rules I think would do well to be observed concerning indiffe­rent things.

1. That we entertain them but as alterable things, in which Authority may use their Liberty to change or abolish them, as the Peace and Edification of the Churches shall require, without fear of offending the Papists in making use of our Liberty, which tends rather to do them and some carnal Pro­testants good; for they are in manifest Slavery to their Cu­stoms; or however may do our own People good, viz. that they may never come to be enslaved so bad as Papists are. Vide Theses Arminii.

2. They be not oppressive by their Multitude, as Augustin complained of them in his time.

3. That they be not dubious, nor subject to breed Scruples in Mens Minds, and Factions amongst them.

4. Not savouring of Superstition; thus the Primitive Church was troubled with Judaizers and Gentilizers, according to the several Schools out of which the Christians came.

5. Not wholly needless, but such as have some convenience. For indifferent may be considered two ways:

(1.) Absolutely, as opposite to convenient; as to say it is in­different, that is, it hath nothing good nor bad in it at all, such things scarce fall under deliberation; and surely no pru­dent Governours will command any such things in Religion, though in Civil Things possibly they may, as Captains, meerly to try their Souldiers Obedience.

(2.) Comparatively, it is indifferent, that is, it is not unlaw­ful by any Law of God commanding or forbidding it; and it may be another thing might serve the turn as well, yet there is some convenience in it without doubt; Governours may com­mand in such things; and all People which are concerned and satisfied of their Lawfulness, are bound to obey, or else all Government would be vain; yet are such Commands even of [Page 26] Magistrates as far as they are concerned (except there inter­pose some Circumstances which may superadd a civil or moral consideration) but directive and paternal, as were those of the Christian Bishops and Councils under the Pagan Empe­rours: the Civil Magistrate by becoming a Christian ipso facto, acquires a Right as the Head of all Political Authority, in the National Churches, concerning matters of Prudence and Con­cord, being Parens Patriae, and Pater-Familias; and may in that regard be called the Bishop of his Kingdoms, as Constantine was called the Universal Bishop of the Empire; and as we com­monly say, that every Master of a Family is a Bishop in his own House. But in such cases there is no necessity to think that such kind of Magistrates Commands must always be back'd with Civil Punishments, or else Authority is despised: for God himself, as many Authors do say from 1 Cor. 7. 38. doth coun­sel us to do better, when he is yet pleased if we do well, and doth not punish us for the breach of all things which he com­mands us.

6. They should be such as agree with the Analogy of the Christian Religion, with the plainness and simplicity of it, &c. not such as are fitter for Theatrical Shows and Pomp, to feed the carnal Eyes and Ears of the People, more than for the decent administration of the Service of a crucified Saviour.

7. We must have a care not to content our selves with a meer formal and customary way of serving God in a road of outward and bodily Observations, so to flamm off our Con­sciences, rather than to study real Godliness, Mortification, true Faith, Love and Charity toward God and Man, above which if any Man advanceth Rites and Ceremonies, let him boast what he will of his Obedience, he turneth lawful things into Pharisaism: Washing of Hands was no unlawful thing of it self.

8. I conceive that they are not to be made Conditions of Communion, so as Men may by their Contumacy be buoy'd up to Excommunication; for that is to declare a Man to be no Christian, but as an Heathen, which is too [Page 27] censorious to, say of one, who for ought you know may be really unsatisfied of the lawfulness of things propounded, (which are indeed indifferent) or else he would willingly observe them; indeed if they be very perspicuously indif­ferent, 'tis a shrewd suspicion of a factious Mind; but Proof, and not Suspicion, must be the ground of Punish­ment.

Thus have I pro modulo, through God's Goodness, satis­fied such Questions as do appertain to Liberty of Consci­ence.